Legitimate arguments for why the original manga has overall superior story telling?

[MR.Mark]

Her being introduced as a punk is just how the character was introduced, why can't you accept that?

Back story is back story, doesn't matter what race a character is. Am I only allowed to compare Freeza in relation to his father or Frost because there similar?

[TheMikado]

Her being introduced as a punk is just how the character was introduced, why can't you accept that?

Back story is back story, doesn't matter what race a character is. Am I only allowed to compare Freeza in relation to his father or Frost because there similar?

Look you can compare anything you want, the fact of the matter is you're asking which is superior in your thread and doing and issue for issue comparison shows that whatever issues the original manga may have Super just plain does it worse. Your thread topic has been answered. The manga is superior. The only thing you've down is attempt to tear down the manga but have given ZERO evidence of Supers superiority. The obvious reason you haven't is because you it isn't.

[MR.Mark]

I'm not tearing anything down, I'm just not taking sides unlike what most fans tend to do.

Could you argue that Super is less consistent because of multiple writers? sure you can. However I'm talking about the basic story telling, which for the most part, the manga doesn't seem to be blowing away Super by any strencth.

No need to act like I insulted your grandmother if I so much as suggested some of the manga's writing is comparable to Super.

No where have I ever even suggested Super was superior either, more like at times equal, if not a natural evolution of where the series was going with the Buu arc anyway.

[TheMikado]

I'm not tearing anything down, I'm just not taking sides unlike what most fans tend to do.

Could you argue that Super is less consistent because of multiple writers? sure you can. However I'm talking about the basic story telling, which for the most part, the manga doesn't seem to be blowing away Super by any strencth.

No need to act like I insulted your grandmother if I so much as suggested some of the manga's writing is comparable to Super.

No where have I ever even suggested Super was superior either, more like at times equal, if not a natural evolution of where the series was going with the Buu arc anyway.

So what evidence do you have that it's equal?

[Zagacious]

"Sell out" argument is weak, ALL works of fiction are created with the intent to make money. Dragon Ball always sold lots of merchandise. Why was the original manga adapted into an anime in the first place, to entertain people for free?

Missing the point entirely of what "selling out" means. Creating good characters that people like will sell merchandise, that's not selling out. Creating events and hyping up characters illogically to the point of creating inconsistencies just for the intentions of selling more merchandise is selling out. I doubt there's a single person who's called them a sell out who doesn't understand the anime exists to make money..

Super has done this with who?

I wasn't saying they did, I was saying using the excuse that the anime is there to make money to defend any possibility of 'selling out' is not an argument. It's assuming they never made any decisions that were solely for the purpose of making money instead of for making a good story in itself when no one really knows if they did, so it's not any different than if someone said 'They're selling out in x instance because of Y' and you just replied with 'No they're not'.

[Lord Beerus]

In the manga, character arcs began and ended respectfully and were generally well told. Big events had much proper build. And everything about the narrative of the original manga intertwined a lot better, even when nonsensical moments happen. Super can sometimes have build up to big moments and sometimes it doesn't. Characters arcs seem to go on continuously before being reset (I'm looking at you Krillin). Nonsensical moments happen in Super but they sometime don't feel organic to the plot (I'm looking at you Super Saiyan Rage).

I think the biggest reason for all these difference is that Super is ultimately a product tackled by many writers to expand on the baseline plot provided by Toriyama while also manufacturing his charm and spirit that was very much apparent when he was writing the manga on a weekly basis, even when he going though major burnout in the later stages of the Majin Boo arc. Don't get me wrong I really enjoy Dragon Ball Super, warts and all, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's Dragon Ball with how the plot is handled. It feels like someone else's Dragon Ball. And it's made more apparent with how characters can act widely different in every other episode or in every other main story arc. Much like Dragon Ball GT, Dragon Ball Super is in this weird area where to an extent it looks like Toriyama's Dragon Ball, it tells a story like Toriyama's Dragon Ball, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's Dragon Ball.

[MR.Mark]

So what evidence do you have that it's equal?

Maybe not every single element of the manga/Super is equal, but I certainly proved that some characters having little to no backstory vs the manga is equal. You have yet to give a satisfactory reason why it's fair to criticize Caulifa's lack of background but not Freeza.

In the manga, character arcs began and ended respectfully and were generally well told. Big events had much proper build. And everything about the narrative of the original manga intertwined a lot better, even when nonsensical moments happen. Super can sometimes have build up to big moments and sometimes it doesn't. Characters arcs seem to go on continuously before being reset (I'm looking at you Krillin). Nonsensical moments happen in Super but they sometime don't feel organic to the plot (I'm looking at you Super Saiyan Rage).

I think the biggest reason for all these difference is that Super is ultimately a product tackled by many writers to expand on the baseline plot provided by Toriyama while also manufacturing his charm and spirit that was very much apparent when he was writing the manga on a weekly basis, even when he going though major burnout in the later stages of the Majin Boo arc. Don't get me wrong I really enjoy Dragon Ball Super, warts and all, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's Dragon Ball with how the plot is handled. It feels like someone else's Dragon Ball. And it's made more apparent with how characters can act widely different in every other episode or in every other main story arc. Much like Dragon Ball GT, Dragon Ball Super is in this weird area where to an extent it looks like Toriyama's Dragon Ball, it tells a story like Toriyama's Dragon Ball, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's Dragon Ball.

Yes well said, and I hate to continually bring up the buu arc, but it IS part of the manga. However a lot of the flaws you described happen in the Buu arc of the manga.

I won't deny super has elements that doesn't feel like Toriyama's Dragon Ball, but is that all necessarily a bad thing?

I wasn't saying they did, I was saying using the excuse that the anime is there to make money to defend any possibility of 'selling out' is not an argument. It's assuming they never made any decisions that were solely for the purpose of making money instead of for making a good story in itself when no one really knows if they did, so it's not any different than if someone said 'They're selling out in x instance because of Y' and you just replied with 'No they're not'.

Splitting hairs really with the whole sell out thing, but you may as well say Toriyama chose to sell out by doing notes for Super in the first place.

[kemuri07]

Why is my Freeza/Caulifa argument invalid?

Because they two characters serve two completely different narrative purposes. Caulifa and Goku are more comparable. They are Saiyans who are considered oddballs within their own saiyan races and love to fight and have all kinds of potential. Highlighting how differently they are handled is a great thing comparison.

So narratively It's fine for an unnamed alien race main villain to have no back story, but for the Saiyan's it's not fine? Why?

Looking at your posts, you seem to be completely missing the point of what TheMikado means by "narrative purposes." It's about context and about execution.

Yes, it's narratively fine for an unnamed "alien race main villain" to not have much of a backstory because it serves the function of the narrative: Freeza is a bad guy. That is all you need to know about the character. He is not a complex character, therefore I don't need to know his "backstory," who he is and where he's from. What makes Freeza the defacto DBZ villain is how Toriyama, through the entirety of the Saiyan/Namek arc, shows us how ruthless and powerful he is.


And to go to the whole selling out thing: Yes, all things are ultimately made to make money. No shit. However, a good show manages to find a balance between trying to capture that audience while also allowing an artist to be as creative as possible. A bad show, or even a medicore one, is content with just running through the same scenarios over and over again--because that's what makes the money. DBZ is the former and DBS feels like the latter--a show that seems concerned with providing fanservice than actually being engaging in any way.

[MR.Mark]

That is all you need to know about the character. He is not a complex character, therefore I don't need to know his "backstory," who he is and where he's from.

Callifla being a arrogant punk is not enough for some people obviously, but again, WHY is it OK for Freeza to not be complex in comparison?

a show that seems concerned with providing fanservice than actually being engaging in any way.

You found nothing engaging about Freeza in the TOP so far? Nothing entertaining or interesting about Zamasu?

[kemuri07]

For the reasons I literally just explained in my previous post.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you do realize that different character can serve a series' narrative in different ways..

right?

[kemuri07]

You found nothing engaging about Freeza in the TOP so far? Nothing entertaining or interesting about Zamasu?

I think Freeza's fun in this arc, not particularly engaging--but fun.

Zamasu? Outside of the whole Black Goku mystery--which turned out to be a dud anyways--Zamasu is a one-note villain, with none of the flair or charisma of previous Dragonball villains. But boy, will he tell you about how he wants to exterminate all humanity--because that's literally his sole character trait.

[MR.Mark]

To each his own, the Black stuff alone more than makes Zamasu more than a mere one-note villain.

It's certainly more refreshing then seeing the formula of "haha I'm stronger then you (gets ass beat), THIS CAN'T BEEEE!!!? (goes apeshit) for the millionth time. Toriyama is quite guilty of doing this a lot.

In the grand scheme of things I don't see how delving into the background of Califla would of served the plot of the TOP. We got to know her personality during her training just as we got to know Freeza during his rampage on Namek.

[PeanutSaiyan]

You found nothing engaging about Freeza in the TOP so far? Nothing entertaining or interesting about Zamasu?

I think Freeza's fun in this arc, not particularly engaging--but fun.

Zamasu? Outside of the whole Black Goku mystery--which turned out to be a dud anyways--Zamasu is a one-note villain, with none of the flair or charisma of previous Dragonball villains. But boy, will he tell you about how he wants to exterminate all humanity--because that's literally his sole character trait.

And his whole motivation for wanting to exterminate humanity is so ridiculously underdeveloped & forced that he's probably one of the worst written characters in the series.

[lord turbo]

That is all you need to know about the character. He is not a complex character, therefore I don't need to know his "backstory," who he is and where he's from.

Callifla being a arrogant punk is not enough for some people obviously, but again, WHY is it OK for Freeza to not be complex in comparison?

If I understand correctly, the correlation is between Goku and Cauli, we are told the Saiyans in U7 are evil and ruthless, if so why is Goku different then? We are giving and explicit reason why in-universe. We are the told the Saiyans in U6 are the exact opposite and instead champions of justice and police the universe, if this is true then why is Cauli different? We are giving no reason why she is different, she just is with zero explanation for it.

You keep bringing up Freeza, yet fail to understand his narrative is different. He's not introduced as part of a race that's either born evil or good and why is he different from the rest. What the others were getting at with Super that's a huge approach of "Meh/Whatever/Who cares" when they introduce something, whether it fits within the established narrative of not they just do it and don't give a shit to explain why and that's the difference most people find with Super compared to DB/Z, there's just this frequent dissonance with Super that isn't there to the same degree with DB/Z.

Like someone else said, this looks Toriyama's DB, even sounds like Toriyama's DB, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's DB, it feels like someone's else interpretation of Toriyama's DB.

[MR.Mark]

In the Super manga maybe, but Zamasu's motivations seemed reasonable to me in the anime.

Why did Freeza want to rule the universe? Just because he is evil and strong?

Face it, we love Freeza beacuse of his brilliant design, voice and personality, but there was no real interesting motivation behind what he does. If anything, he seems to be scheming to do something more interesting in Super than what he was doing on Namek.


Why is Yamcha a desert bandit? because he used to be shy of girls? Guess his character is no better than Caulifa.

Why was Cell evil? Because he wanted to see terror on peoples faces? That was kinda forced and lame, I would of just stuck with the wanted a challenge because he's like an evil Goku.

Buu is fun, but he destroys just cause, simple as that.

[lord turbo]

In the Super manga maybe, but Zamasu's motivations seemed reasonable to me in the anime.

Zamasu is very one dimensional be it anime or manga.

Why did Freeza want to rule the universe? Just because he is evil and strong?

If his father Cold is anything to go by he was simply raised to be like that.

Why was Cell evil? Because he wanted to see terror on peoples faces? That was kinda forced and lame, I would of just stuck with the wanted a challenge because he's like an evil Goku.

Cell was designed and created to be evil so...

Buu is fun, but he destroys just cause, simple as that.

As far as in-universe is concerned, Buu was a failed creation of Bobodi so that's why he's the way he is.

[MR.Mark]

Zamasu is one dimensional compared to Freeza how? So simply being raised by his father is enough? Seems like a lot of head canon on your part.

Cold was invented in the Cell arc and he died just as quickly anyway.

Was Cold the original mastermind behind whatever the organization really was and just let Freeza rule it?

Why was Cold evil? Did he kill his whole race for supremacy? What is he a mutation?

Yeah Cell is evil because we're told he is, weak. He had enough intelligence to go against his programing, the terror on peoples faces was his own choice, and that aspect was lame. Wanting a challenge would of been enough because of his DNA, still not great but passable.

I like Buu but again, we're TOLD not shown why he is what he is, not great story telling.

Was Bobadi a failed magician that was banished from a kingdom for getting power hungry? Did he find Buu for revenge? (because recently Toriyama revealed that Buu has always been around, not created by Bobadi)

You ignored my Yamacha/Caulifa comparison.

[TheMikado]

That is all you need to know about the character. He is not a complex character, therefore I don't need to know his "backstory," who he is and where he's from.

Callifla being a arrogant punk is not enough for some people obviously, but again, WHY is it OK for Freeza to not be complex in comparison?

If I understand correctly, the correlation is between Goku and Cauli, we are told the Saiyans in U7 are evil and ruthless, if so why is Goku different then? We are giving and explicit reason why in-universe. We are the told the Saiyans in U6 are the exact opposite and instead champions of justice and police the universe, if this is true then why is Cauli different? We are giving no reason why she is different, she just is with zero explanation for it.

You keep bringing up Freeza, yet fail to understand his narrative is different. He's not introduced as part of a race that's either born evil or good and why is he different from the rest. What the others were getting at with Super that's a huge approach of "Meh/Whatever/Who cares" when they introduce something, whether it fits within the established narrative of not they just do it and don't give a shit to explain why and that's the difference most people find with Super compared to DB/Z, there's just this frequent dissonance with Super that isn't there to the same degree with DB/Z.

Like someone else said, this looks Toriyama's DB, even sounds like Toriyama's DB, but it just doesn't feel like Toriyama's DB, it feels like someone's else interpretation of Toriyama's DB.

This is correct and really this entire discussion is moot. It seems like the original poster does not even possess the capacity to fundamentally understand the difference between an antagonist and a protagonist. It's the intellectual equivalent of having a conversation with a 3 year old who insists his little red wagon is a fire truck because it has four wheels and it's red. I real discussion cannot be had when the three year old toddler has already made up in his mind that his little red wagon is a several ton fire engine.

Anyway I keep trying to being his back to the original topic at hand. The question is which is superior? The answer is the original manga because when compared NOTE for NOTE on equivalent terms the manga far outshines Super in a literary and narrative sense. It's not a comparison.

AGAIN THE QUESTION WAS NOT WHAT PROBLEMS DO THEY BOTH HAVE.
Rather which is the superior writing. PERIOD.
If the original poster wants to talk about which problems they both have, make a thread for it. If you want to do an actual comparison on superior execution of a literary narrative I'm here all day.

[lord turbo]

Zamasu is one dimensional compared to Freeza how? So simply being raised by his father is enough? Seems like a lot of head canon on your part.

There's literally nothing more to Zamasu then "Rawggg kill all ningen" That's his entire character from start to finish, that's literally text book example 1 dimensional. As for Freeza, if his dad as horrible as his I would imagine he would raise his son in the same fashion from birth, seems logical.

Cold was invented in the Cell arc and he died just as quickly anyway.

Okay...and?

Was Cold the original mastermind behind whatever the organization really was and just let Freeza rule it?

Beats the hell out of me.

Why was Cold evil? Did he kill his whole race for supremacy? What is he a mutation?

Probably raised to be evil by his parents before or by choice? According to Ginyu they are mutants (Confirmed by Toriyama in an interview).

Yeah Cell is evil because we're told he is, weak.

Cell is a genetically engineered weapon, hell, he explains to Piccolo his bloodlust and ruthless nature is probably due to the evil cell of Freeza, Vegeta, and Piccolo Daimao. You create something entirely an evil source, chances are that very thing will be evil as well.

I like Buu but again, we're TOLD not shown why he is what he is, not great story telling.[/quote[

No, we are told he's the equivalent of a science lab experiment gone wrong. At this point you're cheaply nitpicking anything for the sake of nitpicking rather than have a legitimate argument at hand.

You ignored my Yamacha/Caulifa comparison.

Didn't ignore anything, there's nothing wrong with Cauli being a punk leader of delinquent gang members, no one has a problem with that, the problem is why is she like that when we are told the Saiyans in U6 are champions of peace and justice and police the universe against evil doers. You got one Saiyan that goes against the rest for no explained reason. We are told why Goku is different from all the other Saiyans in U7, we are not given the same deal for Cauli. Again, we are fine with her introduction, the problem is unlike DB/Z, Super doesn't explain why she's different.

Is this not the purpose of your topic, to examine the difference between Super and the original series to see why others may consider Super inferior to DB/Z as far as narrative story-telling is concerned?

[kemuri07]

In the Super manga maybe, but Zamasu's motivations seemed reasonable to me in the anime.

Why did Freeza want to rule the universe? Just because he is evil and strong?

Face it, we love Freeza beacuse of his brilliant design, voice and personality, but there was no real interesting motivation behind what he does. If anything, he seems to be scheming to do something more interesting in Super than what he was doing on Namek.


Why is Yamcha a desert bandit? because he used to be shy of girls? Guess his character is no better than Caulifa.

Why was Cell evil? Because he wanted to see terror on peoples faces? That was kinda forced and lame, I would of just stuck with the wanted a challenge because he's like an evil Goku.

Buu is fun, but he destroys just cause, simple as that.

What? What more motivation do you need other than (paraphrasing) he's "Napoleon Space Hitler?" That's literally his entire motivation in Super. He's pure evil, he does not change at all.

Let me make this simple: The elephant in the room, the thing that's alluded to in this thread: DB AND DBZ ARE BOTH VASTLY SUPERIOR SHOWS TO SUPER. So it all comes down to this: Caulifa, like a l ot of the characters in Super, are terrible written which is throwing people off.